Marine Technology, Vol. 30, No. 3, July 1993, pp.

178-187

Vapor Recovery on Tankers from Design to Operation

Chris Clement 1

Vapor control legislation has presented the vessel operator with a multitude of factors that must be given
consideration during the retrofitting of a vessel vapor control system. This paper discusses notable aspects
concerning the integration of various facets of vapor control as they relate to vessel installations from
conceptual design through operation. While complete vessel collection and processing systems are
permitted by the Regulations, discussions in tllis paper are limited to vessel collection systems because,
for the most part, industry has adopted the concept of limiting vessels to the collection of vapors only,
with subsequent transfer to shoreside facilities for processing. Discussions are based on experience
gained during development of vapor collection systems for two different classes of inerted, multi-grade
cargo product tankers. Accordingly, some topics are not applicable or can be simplified when considering
installations on board tank vessels carrying si'~gle cargoes or on non-inerted tank vessels.

Introduction operations, it is t h e facility t h a t is n o r m a l l y responsible to

VAPOR CONTROL legislation has presented the vessel opera-
tor with a m u l t i t u d e of factors t h a t m u s t be given consicier-
ation d u r i n g t h e retrofitting of a vessel vapor control system.
Local and state a i r quality m a n a g e m e n t districts have man-
dated vapor control and set compliance dates. U.S. Coast
G u a r d Regulations have been p r o m u l g a t e d t h a t set m i n i m u m
s t a n d a r d s for construction and operation. The A m e r i c a n Pe-
t r o l e u m I n s t i t u t e has developed and adopted guidelines per-
t a i n i n g to s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n of the t e r m i n a l / v e s s e l interface.
In addition, consideration m u s t also be given to the vessel
o p e r a t o r ' s own safety and operation requirements, special
c h a r t e r p a r t y r e q u i r e m e n t s t h a t m a y exist, t h e size a n d type
of facilities t h e vessel m a y call upon, e q u i p m e n t availability,
a n d t h e time available for system installation.
This p a p e r discusses notable aspects concerning the inte-
g r a t i o n of various facets of vapor control as t h e y relate to
vessel i n s t a l l a t i o n s from conceptual design t h r o u g h opera-
tion. W h i l e complete vessel collection and processing systems
a r e p e r m i t t e d by the Regulations, discussions in this p a p e r
a r e limited to vessel collection systems because, for the most
part, i n d u s t r y has adopted the concept of limiting vessels to
t h e collection of vapors only, with subsequent t r a n s f e r to
shoreside facilities for processing. Discussions a r e based on
experience gained d u r i n g d e v e l o p m e n t of vapor collection
systems for two different classes of inerted, multi-grade cargo
product tankers. Accordingly, some topics a r e not applicable
or can be simplified when considering i n s t a l l a t i o n s on board
t a n k vessels c a r r y i n g single cargoes or on non-inerted t a n k
vessels.
Design considerations
General--Vessel vapor collection systems a r e for the most
p a r t passive systems. Aside from some initial start-up and
disconnecting procedures, vessel personnel's role is often li:m-
ited to m o n i t o r i n g of various p a r a m e t e r s ; the facility u s u a l l y
controls the start-up, the recovery process and the shutdown
c o n c u r r e n t with cargo loading. In addition, most facilities
control the pressure of the vapor coming off the vessel and,
therefore, correspondingly control t h e pressure in the vessel's
cargo tanks? W h e n variations a n d / o r upsets occur d u r i n g
1Clement Engineering Services, Novato, California.
Presented at the March 12, 1992 meeting of the Los Angeles Metropoli-
tan Section of THE SOCIETY OF NAVAL ARCHITECTS AND MARINE ENGINEERS.
t a k e corrective action. As a result, t h e r e is a t e n d e n c y to view
the vessel vapor collection system as a simple extension of
the existing inert gas a n d cargo t a n k venting system, with
some additional piping and i n s t r u m e n t a t i o n .
F o r some applications, such as a single cargo vessel t r a d i n g
between only two or t h r e e ports, simple extensions of existing
systems a r e often a d e q u a t e in satisfying the new regulations,
the o w n e r ' s / o p e r a t o r ' s r e q u i r e m e n t s a n d m i n i m u m installa-
tion cost. However, for vessels with more sophisticated cargo
r e q u i r e m e n t s and m u l t i p l e port call possibilities, consider-
ation of more t h a n system extensions is in order d u r i n g t h e
design process. Several additional factors can be identified
and should be evaluated. These factors include, b u t a r e cer-
t a i n l y not limited to:
• Cargo operation versatility, based on the mix and quan-
t i t y of r e g u l a t e d and non-regulated cargoes carried,
w h e r e a r e g u l a t e d cargo is defined as one whose vapors
m u s t be recovered, and a non-regulated cargo is de-
fined as one whose vapors can be vented to atmosphere.
• Configuration of the vapor collection piping system and
its effect upon operational flexibility.
• P r e s s u r e drop calculations and pipe sizing to optimize
i n s t a l l a t i o n cost versus achievable loading rates.
• The level of control, monitoring and a l a r m functions to
be provided in relation to necessary m a n n i n g levels
for p r u d e n t a n d safe operation.
• The q u a n t i t y and type of pressure safety devices installed
in the system and t h e i r effect upon t a n k protection
versus nuisance vapor emissions.
• R e g u l a t o r y body considerations.
• Anticipation of f u t u r e control m e a s u r e r e q u i r e m e n t s in
a r e a s where the vessel m a y trade.
Cargo operations versatility---Cargo operations can be di-
rectly i m p a c t e d by vapor control legislation. Therefore, t h e
required cargo operations should be clearly defined a t t h e
outset of the design. Consideration m u s t t a k e into account
w h e t h e r a cargo is r e g u l a t e d or non-regulated. Major opera-
tions a n d factors t h a t should be considered include:
• Single cargo loading.
• S i m u l t a n e o u s loading of r e g u l a t e d a n d loading of a non-
r e g u l a t e d cargo.
• S i m u l t a n e o u s loading of a r e g u l a t e d cargo a n d discharg-
ing of a r e g u l a t e d cargo.
• S i m u l t a n e o u s loading of a non-regulated cargo a n d dis-
charging of a r e g u l a t e d cargo.

178 0025-3316/9313003-0178500.45/0 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 • Cargo vapor compatibility considerations.
° Housekeeping operations within jurisdictional areas.
• Ballasting operations within jurisdictional areas.
The ability to perform the identified operations at a facility
located in an area, that requires vapor control, should be
prioritized from most important to least important.
Piping configuration--Vapor collection piping can be ar-
ranged in a variety of configurations to provide a wide range
of operating capability. The configuration that best suits an
individual vessel will be based on cargo, ballasting, and
housekeeping operations required to be performed at the
facilities at which the vessel will call.
Three piping configurations that have been employed uti-
lize all or part of the existing deck inert gas (IG) main and
branch distribution piping to provide vapor collection capabil-
ity. These configurations from lowest cost to most expensive
are (1) System 1: Single IG/Vapor Main; (2) System 2: Single
IG/Vapor Main with individual cargo group venting to atmo-
sphere; and (3) System 3: Dual IG/Vapor Main configuration.
These arrangements are shown in Figs. 1, 2, and 3 respec-
tively. As with most alternatives, the lowest cost configura-
tion also corresponds to least capable system and the highest
cost configuration provides the greatest capability.
The relative merits of each configuration are compared in
Table 1. Of notable importance is the fact that only the dual
main system is considered to be capable of handling
housekeeping operations, such as hydrocarbon purging of
tanks containing vapors from regulated cargoes. In the dual
main system, inert gas can be introduced continuously into
a tank through one IG Main and associated tank branch
piping, and vapor (or inert gas) can be displaced out of the
t a n k and transported ashore via the other IG/Vapor main
and its associated tank branch distribution piping. For single
main systems, the only method available for purging is to
first pressurize the subject tank with inert gas, close the IG
deck block valve, and then vent the tank to shore via the
IG Main, branch distribution piping, and the vapor header
connection. When the tank is vented to shore, the header
valve would be closed, the deck block valve reopened and the
process repeated. At a minimum, several cycles would be
'a", ;£3 JC~: :.'~*,"
:L: '
'j,I. I B:, [
"L',' '}
Fig.
JULY 1993
required to achieve a purged state using this procedure. Short
circuiting is also a distinct possibility because tank vapor
would be vented through the same branch line that is used
to supply the inert gas.
In the future, the ability to perform housekeeping functions
with vapor control may become a significant issue. At present,
only one air quality management district on the West Coast
has adopted a control measure which regulates housekeeping
activities. However, other districts are known to be consider-
ing such measures and their adoption could severely limit
this activity in port.
Pressure drop calculations--Pressure drop calculations are
necessary to evaluate existing IG piping if it is to be utilized
for vapor collection, a n d / o r to evaluate new piping installa-
tions. In addition, both U.S. Coast Guard Regulations and the
American Bureau of Shipping Guide require pressure drop
calculations be performed for vessel vapor collection systems,
in order to provide personnel with pressure drop data as a
function of loading rate.
A basic primer to performing pressure drop calculations is
to clearly and concisely define assumptions and allowable
limits. Often when it comes to pressure drop, there is an
inclination towards conservatism in either the assumptions
a n d / o r limits. A primary reason for this is that no one wants
to be party to a system that cannot achieve design flow capaci-
ties after it is constructed. A secondary cause is that the
source for certain data required for pressure drop calcula-
tions is empirical or experimental in origin. For vapor collec-
tion systems, these two reasons are often compounded by the
fact that a vapor control system involves two separate piping
systems, one on the vessel and one shoreside.
Conservatism can appear in many forms. Design facility
maximum cargo loading rates may be assigned that are
higher than actual achievable rates. Loading rates may be
realistic, but with an unrealistic condition attached. One ex-
ample would be an assumption that cargo is only being loaded
into one tank at the maximum cargo loading rate, when in
fact the geometry of the vessel systems would require that
the cargo be loaded into a minimum of two or more tanks.
Permissible pressure drops may be unduly restrictive. Proper-
SYMBOLLIST
IES~EL'~@~ ~ 5J-TERrL' ~AL',{
O: :T'I S ~ r#,/ V&'tE
[
' -- r''- (q'ii~ .... ~ ~ [~ L jljlrj ¢ LLED
Ak~c,TO~
~ j ~ Pi~
I zz 1
"~._
J* ~L_
IVY%ELvAP~. J
7'4~EU:O~] ]
i
~Jc), , rJC}. t
L~qr '- Th, ,.
1 Vapor control system No. 1 piping diagram: Single IG/Vapor Main
MARINE TECHNOLOGY 179
 VENTBASI WITH S'rMBQ£LIS"
FLk~E ARPESTOR
(TYP 5 PLACES) VESSELVAPOR BUTTERFLY VALVE

EZ2~ P/v/v~NTVALVE
~ ( ~ BALL ) / / ~ LrQIJIO FILLED
\. ./
12" -. \. / / P/v ~BKEF'
/- \ ' FLNE
/ "-... AR~7OR
® / ,/ -,\ 8"
/ ~, pIjRDE PIP~

" :m r6Ti

~8

DECX SEAL

I ¢
\ ~ ' 8"
,\ .,"
8" 6 14" "~ /
12" / "\
\.
-'"" (S~ B~LLj \-

' \ VESSEL VAPOR

NO.6 4 NO. 5 I NO. 4 __ NO. 3 NO. 2 NO. 1 !

TANKS TANKS TANKS TANKS '-- TANFS TANKS
Fig. 2 Vapor control system No. 2 piping diagram: single IG/Vapor Main with individual group venting

S'TM~L L IS]
vENT ~$1 RISER FOR
NON EGULATEO CA.qC,O ~SSEL VAPOR
x BUTTERFLT VALVE

~] P/V V,~LVE

~' _ IOUI~ r ILLE[I

E] ~'/V B ~ E r-"

FLAME
AR~STOR

,@ P,J~E P ' ~

v,~rzdp
C:INNECTI]N

L.~ No. 6
TANk'[i
NO. 5
TAN~L
I
I_
'-
NO. 4
TANKS
NO. 3
TAN~S
'
I NO z
TANFS
A NU. 1
-ANFS
Fig. 3 Vapor control system No. 3 piping diagram: dual IG/Vapor Main arrangement

ties of the vapor composition may be conservatively esti- Figure 4 is a graph of pressure drop in a vessel vapor collec-
mated, since the composition of the mixture changes through- tion system over a range of cargo loading rates. The upper
out the loading cycle. curve represents System 1 and the lower curve S y s t e m 2. The
Effects of conservatism can be dramatic. Sophisticated, systems are identical, except that the 20-ft section of branch
easy to use and accurate pressure drop programs have been piping in System 1 is 6 in., Schedule 80 steel pipe and in
developed for personal computers which offer the designer a System 2 the branch piping has been increased to 8 in. IPS.
quick and effective tool for identifying the impact of conserva- A s s u m e for the m o m e n t that the owner has imposed a maxi-
tive assumptions. Once the piping system geometry is mathe- m u m loading rate of 18 000 bbl/hr at a m a x i m u m pressure
matically defined, the effect on variations in flow rate, pipe drop of 15 in. of water. At this pressure drop, System 1 can
sizes, and/or gas properties can be evaluated quickly, thereby achieve a m a x i m u m allowable loading rate of 16 000 bbl/hr
providing a quick and accurate tool for assessing the impact and System 2 can achieve a rate of 20 000 bbl/hr. For new
of assumptions, limits, and changes in pipe sizes. installations, the designer would select System 2 without

180 JULY 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY

 Table 1 Relative merits of three vapor collection system configurations for inerted tank vessels
System
Item Description No. 1 No. 2 No. 3
1. Installed cost Lowest Middle Highest
2. Single cargo loading and discharge yes yes yes
3. Multiple cargo loading
multiple regulated cargoes together a yes yes yes
regulated and non-regulated cargoes together (compatible
vapors) yes yes yes
regulated and non-regulated cargoes together (incompati-
ble vapors) no yes yes
multiple non-regulated cargoes together ~ yes yes yes
4. Multiple cargo discharging
multiple regulated cargoes together ~ yes yes yes
regulated and non-regulated cargoes together (compatible
vapors) yes yes yes
regulated and non-regulated cargoes together (incompati-
ble vapors) no no yes
multiple non-regulated cargoes together ~ yes yes yes
5. Simultaneous loading and discharging
loading regulated cargo and discharging any cargo (corn yes ''d yes~'d yes
patible vapors) (3) (4) (3) (4)
loading regulated cargo and discharging any cargo (incom- no d no d yes
patible vapors) (4) (4)
loading any cargo and discharging regulated cargo (corn
patible vapors) yes yes yes
loading any cargo and discharging regulated cargo (incom-
patible vapors) no yes yes
6, Ballasting into cargo tanks yes yes yes
7. Housekeeping operations
purging vapor to atmosphere (regulated or non-regulated
vapor) yes yes yes
purging vapor to shore (regulated or non-regulated vapor) no no yes
a All regulated cargo vapors are assumed to be compatible.
All non-regulated cargo vapors are assumed to be compatible.
c Loading rate must be higher than discharge rate. Vapors displaced from tank being loaded must vent to tank being discharged
and ashore.
a IG deck block valve must be closed when discharging vapor ashore.
System description:
No. 1: Single IG/Vapor Main with common vent to the atmosphere for all tanks.
No. 2: Single IG/Vapor Main with individual cargo group venting to atmosphere.
No. 3: Dual IG/Vapor Mains with individual branch connections to each tank from each main. Each main vented separately
to atmosphere.

Pressure Drop from Most Remote Tank to Ve~,selVapor Connection.
~40
I
, z/'
g 30
c i n er t gas deck distribution piping system m a y be found to be
, !
20
O m u l t i t u d e of reasons. First, a growth factor of 25%, (or ot he r
~ 1o
15 5.0 7.5 I0.0 115 15.0 17.5 20.0 22,5 25.0
L O A D I N G R A T E (1(X~'sBarreLsper Hour)
+ System w/th 20 Ft. Long Section of 8" IPS Branch Piping,
IdenticalSystemwith 2.0Ft. Long SectJon of 6" IPS Branch PipinB.
I) Loading a pair of wing tanks simultaneously.
2) 25% Vapor Growth Rate assumed for both Conditions,
Fig. 4 Vapor recovery system pressure drop considerations
question. However, for existing installations t h a t had 6 in.
IPS branch piping in the i n e r t gas system, b la n k e t acceptance
of the design conditions could result in the rip-out and re-
p l a c e m e n t of substantial portions of existing piping. In such
cases, the design conditions, th e i r origin, their rigidity and
the i r effect on sizing should be discussed by all involved
parties.
I n e r t gas systems are required to be sized to supply suffi-
cient inert gas to m a i n t a i n a m i n i m u m t a n k pressure of 100
m m w a t e r gage at 125% of t h e vessel's m a x i m u m discharge
rate. W h e n used for vapor collection, it is cautioned t h a t t he
wholly i n a d e q u a t e for vapor collection. This can occur for a
justifiable growth factor), of the m a x i m u m allowable loading
rate must be assumed in t h e calculations. Second, the facility
m a x i m u m cargo loading rate, for which t h e vessel system
m u s t be designed, m a y be substantially g r e a t e r t h a n t he ves-
sel's m a x i m u m cargo discharge rate. Thirdly, allowable pres-
sure drops for vapor collection m a y be less t h a n t h a t permit-
ted for i n er t gas distribution. Fourthly, viscosity and gas
density have a substantial effect on pressure drops. For a
given volume flow rate, t h e pressure drop t h r o u g h a system
c a r r y i n g i n e r t gas s a t u r a t e d w i t h hydrocarbon vapor will
be a p p r o x i m a t e l y 50% h i g h e r t h a n for t h e identical system
carrying only i n er t gas. This relationship is portrayed in Fig.
6 and is based on gas m i x t u r e s with the following properties:
I n e r t gas:
Density: 0.077 l b / f t 3
Viscosity: 11.5 × 10 -6 lb (mass)/ft-sec
I n e r t g a s / h y d r o c a r b o n vapor mixture:
Density: 0.1256 l b / f t 3
Viscosity: 6.5 × 10 -6 lb (mass)/ft-sec

JULY 1993 MARINE TECHNOLOGY 181


Pressure Drop from Most Remote Tank to Vessel Vapor Connection.
20 ,~
° j
,-I
/ an ullage opening. This is in fact t h e v e r s a t i l i t y of the d u a l
//
° I
~. 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5 15.0 17.5 20.0 22.5 25.0
LOADING RATE (1000's Barrelsper Hour)
System Collecting Inert Gas Saturated with HydrocarbonVapor.
-4- Identical System Collecting only Inert Gas.
1) Loadinga pair of wingtanks simultaneously.
2) ~% Vapor Growth Rate assumed for both Conditions.
Fig. 5 Vapor recovery system pressure drop considerations
In this example, t h e vapor composition of t h e I n e r t G a s /
H y d r o c a r b o n m i x t u r e has been a s s u m e d to be 45% i n e r t gas
a n d 55% h y d r o c a r b o n vapor, which corresponds to the theo-
r e t i c a l s a t u r a t i o n value of h y d r o c a r b o n v a p o r in i n e r t gas. It
is noted t h a t this m i x t u r e is slightly more conservative t h a n
t h e 50-50 I n e r t G a s / H y d r o c a r b o n V a p o r m i x t u r e required
by t h e U.S. Coast G u a r d Regulations.
Control, monitoring, and alarm functions--Minimum re-
q u i r e m e n t s for control, m o n i t o r i n g and a l a r m functions a r e
defined in t h e regulations. These functions a r e required to
m i n i m i z e t h e likelihood of t a n k overfilling a n d provide pro-
tection from o v e r / u n d e r p r e s s u r e and a r e c e r t a i n l y a d e q u a t e
for vessels h a n d l i n g single cargoes. However, for m u l t i p l e
cargo vessels, the designer m a y find it p r u d e n t to analyze a
vessel's operations a n d provide additional control, monil~or-
ing, a n d a l a r m functions to both increase t h e safety of opera-
tions a n d to m i n i m i z e the p r o b a b i l i t y of accidently releasing
a r e g u l a t e d v a p o r into the atmosphere.
F o r vessels c a r r y i n g m u l t i p l e cargoes, t a n k s m a y periodi-
cally be isolated from the V a p o r Collection Main(s) for a w~ri-
e t y of reasons. W h e r e isolation is a common o p e r a t i n g prac-
tice, it is p r u d e n t to provide p r e s s u r e indication for each t a n k
or group of t a n k s t h a t can be isolated, in addition to t h e
r e q u i r e d indication on t h e vapor collection main. P r e s s u r e
i n d i c a t i o n i n s t r u m e n t s provide personnel with a method to
observe t h e effects t h a t e n v i r o n m e n t a l conditions, such as
sun loading, have on isolated tanks.
W h e r e complex operations, involving s i m u l t a n e o u s han-
dling of m u l t i p l e r e g u l a t e d cargoes and m u l t i p l e non-regu-
l a t e d cargoes, a r e common practice, the o w n e r / o p e r a t o r m a y
wish to consider a sophisticated control a n d m o n i t o r i n g Sys-
t e m to provide:
1. Compliance with the safety r e q u i r e m e n t s for pressure
a n d level indication a n d a l a r m .
2. Centralized r e m o t e control of t a n k b r a n c h valves to off-
set a d d i t i o n a l vessel personnel workload caused by vapor col-
lection system i n s t a l l a t i o n a n d operation.
3. Artificial intelligence to t r a c k cargoes by t a n k to i n s u r e
p r o p e r valve a l i g n m e n t , so t h a t accidental releases of regu-
l a t e d cargo vapors into t h e a t m o s p h e r e a r e prevented.
T h e use of a r t i f i c i a l intelligence m a y i n i t i a l l y a p p e a r to be
overkill for t h e t a s k a t hand. However, t h e r e is justification
for this level of sophistication in c e r t a i n applications. Con-
sider a vessel with t w e n t y cargo t a n k s and t e n cargo systems
t h a t r o u t i n e l y c a r r i e s seven to t e n cargoes simultaneous}.y.
A s s u m e this vessel has a d u a l I G / V a p o r M a i n s with valw~d
182 JULY 1993
b r a n c h connections from each m a i n to each t a n k , a n d individ-
ual t a n k purge pipes connected by valves such t h a t t h e y can
be vented to a t m o s p h e r e or into one of t h e v a p o r mains.
F i n a l l y , a s s u m e t h a t t a n k s c a r r y i n g a G r a d e "E" cargo, such
as lube oils, a r e to be isolated from both I G / V a p o r M a i n s a n d
m a i n t a i n e d in a non-inerted s t a t e w i t h direct v e n t i n g t h r o u g h
I G / V a p o r M a i n a r r a n g e m e n t shown in Fig. 3. In t h e s y s t e m
depicted in Fig. 3, six possible t a n k I G / V a p o r s y s t e m align-
m e n t s a r e possible for each t a n k , including those r e q u i r e d
for h y d r o c a r b o n purging. Also, w h e n loading a cargo, t h e
previous cargo t h a t was in the t a n k m u s t be considered such
t h a t t h e r e a r e two ways to a t t a i n c e r t a i n valve a l i g n m e n t s .
Therefore, for each t a n k t h e r e a r e eight possible processes to
be considered for loading. If all t a n k s were lined up at one
time, p o t e n t i a l l y one h u n d r e d a n d sixty different combina-
tions of valve a l i g n m e n t would h a v e to be considered. Of
course cargo loadings rarely, if ever, s t a r t and complete simul-
taneously. C e r t a i n cargoes m a y be loaded c o n c u r r e n t l y , while
o t h e r cargoes load sequentially. Some cargoes m a y o v e r l a p
t h e loading or discharge of others. Therefore, in o r d e r to
insure p r o p e r a l i g n m e n t , the a c t u a l valve positioning c a n n o t
be p e r f o r m e d until such time t h a t cargo o p e r a t i o n s for t h a t
t a n k commence.
Computer-based artificial intelligence systems provide a
m e c h a n i s m to insure p r o p e r a l i g n m e n t s for each t a n k based
on the cargo to be loaded and t h e previous cargo in t h e tank.
F o r each cargo, t h e proper valve a l i g n m e n t can be stored in
p e r m a n e n t memory. W h e r e a p p r o p r i a t e , two a l i g n m e n t s for
a given cargo can be stored in m e m o r y , if t h e previous cargo
could effect alignment. Previous cargo d a t a can a u t o m a t i -
cally be stored in m e m o r y based on t h e last loading port.
Then, for a n y given t a n k , the o p e r a t o r can e n t e r t h e cargo
to be loaded by n a m e a n d the c o m p u t e r can d e t e r m i n e t h e
proper alignment. The a l i g n m e n t produced by t h e c o m p u t e r
m a y be used by t h e o p e r a t o r as a n aid in p r o p e r l y a l i g n i n g
t h e tanks, or if t h e I G / V a p o r valves have been fitted w i t h
power actuators, t h e c o m p u t e r can a c t u a l l y e x e c u t e t h e align-
ment. W h e r e valves a r e fitted with actuators, t h e use of artifi-
cial intelligence offers an additional advantage. N a m e l y , t h e
cargo officer, u s u a l l y t h e chief mate, can produce a l i g n m e n t
scenarios for all t a n k s at one time, a n d t h e a c t u a l a l i g n m e n t s
can be executed by t h e officer on w a t c h at t h e t i m e cargo
operations for t h a t t a n k commence. This c a p a b i l i t y mini-
mizes the probability of a control m e a s u r e violation for regu-
lated vapor releases because of possible valve m i s a l i g n m e n t
in complex systems.
Artificial intelligence requires a m a n / m a c h i n e interface,
u s u a l l y in t h e form of a PC-type c o m p u t e r or o t h e r specially
designed processor, k e y p a d and d i s p l a y u n i t combination. In
most cases t h e e q u i p m e n t can or is fitted with c o m m u n i c a t i o n
ports, which allow i n f o r m a t i o n from o t h e r systems to be dis-
played as a n a u x i l i a r y screen on t h e c o m p u t e r display. One
e x a m p l e of this is the collection and d i s p l a y of t a n k level
d a t a directly from the t a n k level i n d i c a t i n g system. Also, t h e
c o m m u n i c a t i o n ports can be used to t r a n s m i t d a t a to a r e m o t e
source. One such i n s t a l l a t i o n has t h e p r i m a r y m a n / m a c h i n e
interface (computer) in t h e cargo control room w i t h a slave
unit on t h e navigation bridge. The Bridge u n i t is a m o n i t o r
only t y p e u n i t from which all t a n k level, p r e s s u r e a n d valve
position d a t a can be m o n i t o r e d b u t not controlled.
Pressure~vacuum safety devices.--Prior to t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n
of vapor control, t a n k vapor displaced d u r i n g cargo loading
was vented to atmosphere. W i t h t h e a d v e n t of v a p o r control,
t h e v a p o r for r e g u l a t e d cargoes is displaced to t h e facility
vapor control system. F r o m t h e vessel's s t a n d p o i n t t h e facil-
ity m u s t be considered to be a p o t e n t i a l l y closed-end device.
Some facilities utilize t h e vessel's t a n k p r e s s u r e as t h e p r i m e
mover of t h e vapor, while o t h e r facilities a r e utilizing blowers
MARINE TECHNOLOGY
or compressors to pull t h e v a p o r from t h e vessel. R e g a r d l e s s
of t h e principle used for displacing t h e gas, all facilities h a v e
s h u t d o w n s y s t e m s which can close a valve t h a t blocks flow
of v a p o r from t h e vessel's cargo tanks. Facilities t h a t utilize
blowers or compressors h a v e f a i l u r e scenarios which could
r e s u l t in a v a c u u m being p u l l e d on t h e vessel's cargo tanks.
T h e p r o b a b i l i t y of a t a n k o v e r / u n d e r p r e s s u r e condition is
i n c r e a s e d w i t h v a p o r control, because t h e vessel's v e n t i n g
s y s t e m is i n t e r c o n n e c t e d to a n o t h e r system t h a t is controlled
by others. Accordingly, t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h e o v e r / u n d e r
p r e s s u r e safety devices is g r e a t l y increased.
T h e two most common devices for p r e s s u r e / v a c u u m protec-
tion a r e t h e p r e s s u r e / v a c u u m relief valve (P/V valve) a n d
t h e liquid filled p r e s s u r e / v a c u u m b r e a k e r ( P / V breaker). The
p r i m a r y a d v a n t a g e of P / V valves is also t h e w e a k n e s s of P /
V b r e a k e r s : n a m e l y P / V valves will r e s e a t after a p r e s s u r e
excursion (either p r e s s u r e or vacuum), w h e r e a s when a P / V
b r e a k e r blows a n d t a n k p r e s s u r e equalizes to a t m o s p h e r i c
unless t h e b r e a k e r can be isolated. However, if a b r e a k e r can
be isolated, it does not qualify as a required pressure relieving
device. The p r i m a r y a d v a n t a g e of P / V b r e a k e r s is t h a t t h e y
provide for full flow relief a t t h e set point. A n o t h e r a d v a n t a g e
of P / V b r e a k e r s is t h e w e a k n e s s of P / V valves. P / V b r e a k e r s
provide a t i g h t seal right up to t h e i r set point, w h e r e a s a P /
V valve will begin to l e a k a t some point before r e a c h i n g t h e
p r e s s u r e or v a c u u m set point. The reason for the l e a k i n g is
t h a t most valves use weights or springs to provide resistance
to pressure. R e s u l t a n t l y , t h e force holding t h e disc a g a i n s t
t h e seat is g r e a t e s t a t zero pressure a n d decreases to zero a t
t h e set point.
W h e n selecting a n d positioning P / V valves and P / V break-
ers, consideration should be given to t h e s t r e n g t h s a n d weak-
nesses of each, t h e i r set points, a n d t h e new and existing
sources of p r e s s u r e and v a c u u m excursions. W h e n loading
cargo with vapor collection, t h e m a x i m u m source of t a n k
p r e s s u r e is compression of v a p o r within a t a n k as liquid dis-
places t h e v a p o r space a t the m a x i m u m liquid loading rate.
V a c u u m conditions can occur if vapor is being pulled from
t h e space (from a blower or compressor ashore) a t a faster
r a t e t h a n liquid is being loaded into t h e tank. W h e n discharg-
ing cargo, p r e s s u r e build-up in a t a n k can be no g r e a t e r t h a n
t h e IG fan capacity, a n d t h e r a t e of pressure reduction c a n n o t
be g r e a t e r t h a n the vessel p u m p i n g system capacity con-
nected to t h e t a n k .
Most systems use a combination of P / V b r e a k e r s a n d P /
V valves to protect a g a i n s t the aforementioned sources of
p r e s s u r e a n d vacuum. P / V b r e a k e r s will be located on the
v a p o r collection m a i n to satisfy t h e 125% relieving require-
m e n t a t t h e m a x i m u m allowable loading r a t e required by
t h e vapor control regulations. P / V valves will n o r m a l l y be
positioned to protect t a n k s or groups of t a n k s t h a t can be
isolated from t h e vapor collection main, a n d sized a r b i t r a r i l y
or according to IG blower a n d cargo p u m p capacities.
Set point considerations a r e twofold in nature: One, P / V
v a l u e p r e s s u r e set points should be set as far above t h e in-
t e n d e d o p e r a t i n g pressure as practical. The g r e a t e r the differ-
e n t i a l b e t w e e n set point a n d o p e r a t i n g pressure, t h e g r e a t e r
t h e sealing force between the seat and disc and t h e less likely
t h e valve is to leak. Two, the P / V b r e a k e r set points (both
p r e s s u r e a n d vacuum) should be set slightly outside the P / V
valve set points. Configured in this m a n n e r , the P / V valves
will absorb t h e m a j o r i t y of p r e s s u r e / v a c u u m excursions, t h u s
m i n i m i z i n g vapor releases due to blown P / V breakers.
Regulatory body considerations--In the course of designing,
i n s t a l l i n g a n d witnessing t h e operation of several vessel va-
por collection systems, a few concerns and inconsistencies
w i t h t h e r e g u l a t i o n s have occurred, which a r e w o r t h y of men-
tion. These include concerns about level a l a r m set points,
level a l a r m indication, a n d p r e s s u r e indication e q u i p m e n t
JULY 1993
r e q u i r e m e n t s . P u r p o s e l y excluded from t h i s discussion is t h e
overall issue of safety of v e s s e l / f a c i l i t y v a p o r control systems,
which is considered to be a topic to which a n e n t i r e p a p e r
could be dedicated.
It is noted t h a t both U.S. Coast G u a r d a n d t h e A m e r i c a n
B u r e a u of S h i p p i n g (ABS) have p r o m u l g a t e d rules a n d regula-
tions for vessel v a p o r control systems. U.S. Coast G u a r d Regu-
lations were adopted first and, subsequently, a c o n c e n t r a t e d
effort has been e x p e n d e d to i n s u r e t h a t t h e ABS " G u i d e for
Cargo V a p o r Emission Control S y s t e m s on Board T a n k Ves-
sels" is consistent w i t h the U.S. Coast G u a r d Regulations.
Consistency has been achieved w i t h t h e exception of t h e set
point r e q u i r e m e n t s for the t a n k overflow a l a r m s .
ABS requires t h a t t h e overflow a l a r m s m u s t be set a t a
point in which cargo loading can proceed a t t h e M a x i m u m
Allowable T r a n s f e r R a t e (MATR) for at least 60 seconds be-
fore t a n k overflow, w h e r e t h e M A T R is defined as t h e maxi-
m u m v o l u m e t r i c r a t e at which a vessel m a y receive cargo or
ballast. Thus, a t o t a l vessel r e q u i r e m e n t is being a p p l i e d to
a single t a n k , which could r e s u l t in a n u n r e a l i s t i c a l l y low set
point for the overflow a l a r m .
In contrast, t h e U.S. Coast G u a r d R e g u l a t i o n is m o r e realis-
tic. It states, " T h e t a n k overfill a l a r m m u s t a l a r m e a r l y
enough to allow t h e person in c h a r g e of t r a n s f e r o p e r a t i o n s to
stop t h e t r a n s f e r operations before t h e cargo t a n k overflows."
This inconsistency h a s been pointed out to ABS on s e v e r a l
occasions, since t h e first publication of t h e Guide, b u t as of
this writing, t h e inconsistency h a s not been resolved.
The regulations require t h a t each t a n k be fitted w i t h a
high level and a t a n k overfill a l a r m , a n d t h a t t h e t a n k overfill
a l a r m s have audio a n d visual indications t h a t can be seen
a n d h e a r d on t h e vessel where cargo t r a n s f e r is controlled a n d
in t h e cargo deck area. F o r vessels w h e r e cargo is n o r m a l l y
controlled from a cargo control room, t h e r e q u i r e m e n t for
t h e overfill a l a r m s being e x t e n d e d to t h e deck have been
the subject of some controversy. One position h a s been t h a t
individual a l a r m s for each t a n k m u s t be provided on deck,
and t h e o t h e r position has been t h a t a single s u m m a r y a l a r m
on deck satisfies t h e i n t e n t of t h e regulations. In S e p t e m b e r
1991, U.S. Coast G u a r d accepted t h e single s u m m a r y a l a r m
as m e e t i n g t h e i n t e n t of t h e Rules. F o r vessels loading m o r e
t h a n one cargo simultaneously, it is t h e opinion of m a n y ,
including this author, t h a t t h e single visual s u m m a r y a l a r m
is a c t u a l l y safer t h a n individual t a n k a l a r m s in t h e cargo
deck area. On occasions when t h e officer on d u t y is on deck
a n d an a l a r m does occur, a single s u m m a r y a l a r m provides
t h e officer only one choice: s h u t down all cargo or risk a t a n k
overflow event. In t h e case of i n d i v i d u a l a l a r m s , an officer
could conceivably choose to s h u t d o w n a specific cargo i n s t e a d
of all cargo. In such cases, t h e r e is a risk t h a t he could choose
to stop the incorrect cargo.
Also, with respect to t a n k overflow deck a l a r m s , t h e regula-
tions do not specifically address w h e t h e r or not these a l a r m s
can be disabled a t sea. The r e a l i t y of the m a t t e r is t h a t t a n k
overflow alarms, a n d a n y o t h e r a l a r m s t h a t t h e d e s i g n e r m a y
elect to place on deck, m u s t be defeated d u r i n g n a v i g a t i o n of
the vessel. F a i l u r e to do so could r e s u l t in a l a r m s occurring
when t a n k s a r e full a n d t h e vessel rolls. A t night, the a l a r m s
would most c e r t a i n l y be a d i s t r a c t i o n to navigation. T i m e
delays could be i n c o r p o r a t e d into t h e a l a r m s , b u t doing so
effectively raises the set point of t h e a l a r m s .
The vapor control system r e g u l a t i o n s r e q u i r e a pressure-
sensing device in t h e m a i n vapor collection line. F o r those
who consider electric-type t r a n s m i t t e r s , t h e r e g u l a t i o n s re-
quire t h a t t h e t r a n s m i t t e r be explosion-proof if located on
deck a n d of t h e intrinsically-safe type if w i t h i n t h e cargo
tanks. Coast G u a r d has now m a d e an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e
rules a n d requires t h a t electric-type t r a n s m i t t e r s used in a
vapor collection m a i n m u s t be of the intrinsically-safe type.
MARINE TECHNOLOGY 183
F o r most t r a n s m i t t e r s , t h e p r e s s u r e sensing d i a p h r a g m is
outside the explosion-proof barrier. Since t h e d i a p h r a g m is
exposed to the m e d i a being m e a s u r e d and since t h e vapor
m a i n can be an e~plosive m i x t u r e , the intrinsically-safe t y p e
t r a n s m i t t e r h a s p r o p e r l y been d e e m e d chosen.
Future control measures--Early v a p o r control m e a s u r e s
t h a t h a v e been adopted a n d a r e now in effect, address only
t h e control of volatile organic compound, (VOC), emissions
d u r i n g t h e loading of cargo. L a t e r measures, which have been
passed b u t a r e not y e t in effect, e x p a n d r e g u l a t e d o p e r a t i o n s
a n d in m a n y cases include h o u s e k e e p i n g a n d b a l l a s t i n g opera-
tions. F u t u r e r e g u l a t e d operations, such as housekeeping,
could have a profound i m p a c t on a v a p o r collection system
design. If a vessel will t r a d e in a subject a r e a after t h e effec-
tive d a t e a n d will have to conduct operations subject to these
s t r i n g e n t controls, t h e n n e c e s s a r y c a p a b i l i t y should be in-
cluded in t h e i n i t i a l design of the system.
Installation considerations
The t i m e r e q u i r e d for t h e r e t r o f i t t i n g of a vessel vapor
collection system is of course v e r y d e p e n d e n t upon its com-
plexity. Regardless of t h e complexity of t h e system, t h e
o w n e r / o p e r a t o r will w a n t it installed a n d m a d e operable in a
t i m e f r a m e t h a t does not exceed t h e vessel's n o r m a l s h i p y a r d
a v a i l a b i l i t y . F o r simple installations, w h e r e existing systems
a r e e x t e n d e d a n d / o r modified, this goal is u s u a l l y a t t a i n a b l e
w i t h o u t incident. However, for complex systems with signifi-
c a n t a m o u n t s of new piping a n d / o r a u t o m a t i o n , completion
of a n i n s t a l l a t i o n in a period of two or t h r e e weeks is a chal-
lenge t h a t r e q u i r e s engineering, with due consideration for
m i n i m i z i n g t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n period.
Piping installation--When significant a m o u n t s of pipe
w o r k a r e involved, it is essential to p r e f a b r i c a t e as much pipe
as possible p r i o r to t h e vessel's a r r i v a l a t the facility, no
m a t t e r w h a t pipe m a t e r i a l is to be used. P r e f a b r i c a t i o n re-
quires t h a t a r r a n g e m e n t plans be completed in a t i m e l y man-
n e r a n d t h a t t h e c o n t r a c t for the work be a w a r d e d e a r l y
enough to p e r m i t t h e c o n t r a c t o r to survey t h e vessel in suffi-
cient detail to g e n e r a t e spool drawings. Such surveys a r e
i d e a l l y to be m a d e with t h e designer present, so t h a t t h e
effect on design p a r a m e t e r s of cost a n d / o r t i m e saving ideas
p u t forth by t h e c o n t r a c t o r can be e v a l u a t e d on the spot. In
developing pipe spools, t h e sequence of i n s t a l l a t i o n m u s t be
given consideration, so t h a t t a i l pieces for fit-up can be pro-
vided as necessary, b u t not in excess. This is critical for piping
t h a t m u s t be i n t e r n a l l y coated.
In a d d i t i o n to p r e - p l a n n i n g t h e piping a r r a n g e m e n t , consid-
e r a t i o n should be given to piping m a t e r i a l a n d coating re-
q u i r e m e n t s . T r a d i t i o n a l l y , i n e r t gas system piping has been
constructed from i n t e r n a l l y coated, heavy-wall carbon steel
pipe, in o r d e r to s t a n d up to the corrosive effects of i n e r t gas
a n d cargo vapor containing large a m o u n t s of sulfur. This has
p r o v e n to be a n effective combination for t h e service, b u t its
i n s t a l l a t i o n is also a t i m e consuming process on a retrofit
basis, a n d one w h e r e control of t h e i n t e r n a l coating q u a l i t y
is s o m e t i m e s beyond the r e a c h of the vessel owner. T h e r e a r e
two p r i m a r y factors t h a t m a k e coated carbon steel pipe time-
c o n s u m i n g to install: (1) a significant n u m b e r of t a k e d o w n
j o i n t s a r e r e q u i r e d to insure good i n t e r n a l coating and (2), on
a r e t r o f i t basis, coated carbon steel piping requires the efforts
a n d coordination of four labor crafts: pipefitters, rigging,
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , a n d p a i n t e r / b l a s t e r s . A f t e r final fit-up a n d
weld-out a r e complete, pipe spools m u s t be removed from t h e
vessel, t r a n s p o r t e d to the p a i n t shop, p r e p a r e d a n d coal;ed,
r e t u r n e d to t h e vessel, lifted aboard, and t h e n reinstalled.
F o r i n s t a l l a t i o n on board vessels, w h e r e corrosion from
sulfur is of reduced concern, such as vessels with diesel fired
i n e r t gas g e n e r a t o r s , consideration should be given to t h e use
184 JULY 1993
of t h i n - w a l l e d (Schedule 10) c o r r o s i o n - r e s i s t a n t piping, such
as stainless steel. If inch a m a t e r i a l is d e t e r m i n e d acceptable,
t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n benefits a r e enormous. I n s t a l l e d cost for
stainless steel on a retrofit basis has proven to be lower t h a n
for coated carbon steel pipe, because savings in l a b o r costs
m o r e t h a n offset increased m a t e r i a l costs. L a b o r savings a r e
achieved since t h e n u m b e r of t a k e down joints can be r e d u c e d
a n d because once t h e pipe spools a r e a b o a r d t h e vessel, t h e i r
fit-up a n d i n s t a l l a t i o n is basically a one c r a f t job, i n s t e a d of
a four craft job. In a m a j o r i n s t a l l a t i o n , w h e r e s t a i n l e s s steel
piping was a c t u a l l y used in lieu of coated carbon steel, t h e
c a l e n d a r d a y t i m e savings was e s t i m a t e d to be a p p r o x i m a t e l y
20%.
Automation--When considering a n y a u t o m a t i o n system, it
is emphasized t h a t t h e p r i m a r y reason for a n y a u t o m a t i o n
is to reduce overall life cycle cost. This life-cycle cost m u s t
include initial cost, m a i n t e n a n c e cost, cost savings from re-
duced labor, a n d lost o p p o r t u n i t y cost if t h e s y s t e m should
not function properly. Some subjective issues, such as t h e
r a m i f i c a t i o n s of i m p r o p e r o p e r a t i o n of a system a n d its poten-
tial costs m u s t also be considered.
One of t h e most misconceived benefits of t o d a y ' s s t a t e of
t h e a r t d i s t r i b u t e d control systems over a c o n v e n t i o n a l h a r d -
wired system is reduced i n s t a l l e d costs. By s t r a t e g i c place-
m e n t of I / O stations t h r o u g h o u t t h e control a n d m o n i t o r i n g
area, t h e required a m o u n t of system components a n d cable
can be optimized. W h e n p r e p a r i n g proposals, v e n d o r s will t r y
to optimize I / O p l a c e m e n t in o r d e r to be competitive. As a
result, when considering an a u t o m a t i o n package, the de-
signer is likely to receive a m u l t i t u d e of proposals, none of
which m a y r e p r e s e n t t h e m i n i m u m life-cycle cost for t h e
owner.
A n e x a m p l e c l e a r l y d e m o n s t r a t e s this paradox. One auto-
m a t i o n design t h a t t h e a u t h o r has been associated with con-
t a i n e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 500 i n p u t s a n d o u t p u t s (I/O points),
including r e m o t e a c t u a t i o n a n d position i n d i c a t i o n for ap-
p r o x i m a t e l y 50 valves a n d position indication only for an-
o t h e r 20 valves. Valves and o t h e r I / O points were s p r i n k l e d
from one end of t h e cargo deck a r e a to the other. Based on
p r e l i m i n a r y discussions from a u t o m a t i o n vendors, it was esti-
m a t e d t h a t cable r e q u i r e m e n t s for power a n d control cable
would r a n g e from 7000 to 10 000 ft of 10-conductor, 14-AWG
cable. F o r c o m p a r a t i v e purposes, a n i n t e r n a l e s t i m a t e for a
hard-wired system was prepared, which i n d i c a t e d t h a t ap-
p r o x i m a t e l y 20 000 ft of cable would be required. Based on
the vastly different a m o u n t s of cable required, i n i t i a l l y it
a p p e a r e d t h a t t h e d i s t r i b u t e d control system offered signifi-
c a n t savings in both cost and i n s t a l l a t i o n time.
As expected, when initial proposals were received, all were
based on m i n i m i z i n g cable by locating I / O s t a t i o n s on t h e
w e a t h e r deck w i t h i n e x p l o s i o n - p r o o f / w a t e r t i g h t enclosures.
Not one contained a n a l t e r n a t i v e w h e r e all I / O was located
in a c e n t r a l location, such as t h e cargo control room. D u r i n g
the t i m e between initial and final proposals, a d e t a i l e d s t u d y
of t h e cable i n s t a l l a t i o n was made. The most significant con-
clusion from the s t u d y was t h a t t h e 10 000 to 13 000 addi-
tional feet of cable required for a centralized system was
d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y inexpensive cable from both a cost a n d
i n s t a l l a t i o n standpoint. Most of t h e a d d i t i o n a l cable would
be located in the existing fore-aft w i r e w a y on t h e u p p e r deck,
which would have to be opened up from end to end, r e g a r d l e s s
of the system chosen. New a t h w a r t s h i p deck r u n s of cable
were essentially t h e s a m e for both t h e d i s t r i b u t e d a n d central-
ized systems. The a d d i t i o n a l cost for wiring to a c e n t r a l loca-
tion a m o u n t e d to a m a t e r i a l cost for cable only. L a b o r cost
for r u n n i n g the cable was offset by t h e savings realized by
e l i m i n a t i n g t h e explosion-proof, w a t e r t i g h t boxes on deck.
The system installed was a h a r d - w i r e d centralized control
system with all I / O positioned in a single location. W h i l e
MARINE TECHNOLOGY
i n s t a l l e d cost of t h e centralized system was slightly higher,
it is e s t i m a t e d i n s t a l l a t i o n t i m e was identical to a d i s t r i b u t e d
control system. In addition, t h e benefits of t h e centralized
system over t h e life of t h e vessel far outweighed t h e addi-
t i o n a l first costs. Some of t h e more i m p o r t a n t benefits of the
c e n t r a l i z e d system as i n s t a l l e d are:
1. All I / O is located in a controlled e n v i r o n m e n t a n d not
in a Class I, Division 1 h a z a r d o u s area, which is periodically
a w a s h w h e n the vessel is a t sea.
2. All I / O is located in a c e n t r a l location, which g r e a t l y
simplified s t a r t - u p and troubleshooting of t h e system.
3. All e q u i p m e n t on deck can be electrically isolated indi-
vidually, allowing a n y c o m p o n e n t to be serviced or replaced,
w i t h o u t h a v i n g to shutdown t h e e n t i r e system.
Operating experience
Systems, which have been designed to the latest U.S. Coast
G u a r d Regulations, have been in operation since the middle
of 1990 t h r o u g h o u t t h e country. S t a r t - u p of facilities and
t h e i r interface with vessels has for t h e most p a r t been w i t h o u t
incident. However, some i n t e r e s t i n g experience has been
g a i n e d t h a t deserves comment.
Tank pressure considerations--The most p r o m i n e n t i m p a c t
t h a t vapor control has h a d on vessel operations is r e g u l a t i o n
of cargo t a n k pressures. Regulations for inerted t a n k vessels
r e q u i r e t h a t t h e cargo t a n k s be m a i n t a i n e d a t a slight positive
pressure; 4 in. of w a t e r (0.144 psig) m i n i m u m . If pressure
drops below the pressure a l a r m set point, pressure can be
increased t h r o u g h the admission of i n e r t gas. P r i o r to vapor
control legislation, excess pressure could be vented directly
to a t m o s p h e r e using e i t h e r a pressure control valve set at a
given p r e s s u r e or by a high velocity vent valve. In t h e event
of an o v e r p r e s s u r e or v a c u u m condition, t h e t a n k s were pro-
tected by e i t h e r a p r e s s u r e / v a c u u m relief valve a n d / o r a
liquid filled p r e s s u r e / v a c u u m breaker.
W i t h vapor control, flexibility for controlling t a n k pressure
is reduced a n d the consequences of pressure excursions is
increased. Additionally, vapor control introduces a n o t h e r
v a r i a b l e into t h e equation: namely, different facilities have
different t a n k pressure requirements. A t facilities on the
W e s t Coast, desired pressures at t h e r a i l have r a n g e d from
8 to 20 in. of w a t e r (0.3 to 0.7 psig). W i t h i n jurisdictional
a r e a s today, v e n t i n g to reduce cargo t a n k pressures violates
t h e i n t e n t of t h e control measures. Excess pressure adjust-
m e n t s m u s t now be m a d e prior to e n t e r i n g the j u r i s d i c t i o n a l
area. Depending on t h e location of the facility, this adjust-
m e n t m a y have to be m a d e four to six hours, or more, prior
to c o m m e n c e m e n t of loading. Since e n v i r o n m e n t a l effects
could have a significant i m p a c t on pressure over this time
frame, personnel m u s t t a k e t h e m into account as well as the
facility p r e s s u r e requirements.
F o r vessels calling at facilities designed to h a n d l e only in-
e r t e d t a n k vessels, v a c u u m conditions within a t a n k can be
devastating. In the event t h a t v a c u u m in a t a n k is g r e a t
enough to pop a relief valve on vacuum, sufficient a i r could
be introduced into a t a n k to b r i n g total oxygen levels above
t h e 9% shutdown threshold. Thus, v a c u u m conditions m u s t
be carefully m o n i t o r e d a n d avoided.
E n v i r o n m e n t a l effects on t a n k p r e s s u r e can be substantial.
One d r a m a t i c e x a m p l e occurred at a facility in t h e San F r a n -
cisco A r e a w h e r e cargo operations were i n t e r r u p t e d for the
loading of vessel stores. A vapor control shutdown occurred
w h e n r e s t a r t i n g cargo causing a d d i t i o n a l delay in v a p o r flow.
All total, v a p o r flow from t h e vessel was curtailed for a four
hour period, d u r i n g which t i m e sun loading on t h e deck in-
creased t a n k pressures by more t h a n 18 in. of water. H a d the
d e l a y been longer a n d initial t a n k pressures higher, it is
JULY 1993
c e r t a i n l y conceivable t h a t a P / V valve could have lifted on
pressure, r e l e a s i n g t a n k vapors to t h e a t m o s p h e r e .
Pressure control--A survey of six facilities in t h e San F r a n -
cisco A r e a r e v e a l e d t h a t four of t h e six used blowers or com-
pressors to t r a n s p o r t vapor from t h e vessel to t h e d e s t r u c t i o n /
recovery device. These facilities h a d m e a n s to control vessel
t a n k pressures via a p r e s s u r e control valve n e a r t h e facility
vapor connection. Two facilities relied solely on vessel t a n k
p r e s s u r e for t h e d i s p l a c e m e n t ashore a n d t h r o u g h t h e de-
s t r u c t i o n / r e c o v e r y device. A t these facilities, no p r e s s u r e con-
trol valve was installed shoreside.
F o r i n e r t e d t a n k vessels, it is desirable to h a v e a m e t h o d
to control p r e s s u r e a t the vessel vapor connection, so t h a t
vessel personnel can m a i n t a i n positive t a n k p r e s s u r e to be
sure of m a i n t a i n i n g an i n e r t e d e n v i r o n m e n t at all times.
Accordingly, some inerted vessels have p r e s s u r e control
valves fitted in t h e i r collection systems for this purpose. A t
facilities w i t h o u t pressure control, the vessel control valve is
set at an agreed to set point a n d opens only far enough to
m a i n t a i n the set point pressure. If loading r a t e increases or
decreases, the valve adjusts accordingly. Since vapor is h i g h l y
compressible, t h e r a t e of change of vapor flow is sufficiently
slow t h a t it does not adversely effect the d e s t r u c t i o n / r e c o v e r y
device operation.
F o r vessels fitted with t h e i r own p r e s s u r e control valve,
calling a t facilities with t h e i r own p r e s s u r e control valve,
t h e r e is often a conflict because the two p r e s s u r e control
valves will f r e q u e n t l y be connected in series. In such situa-
tions, t h e facility in all likelihood will r e q u i r e t h e i r valve be
used to control pressure and t h a t the vessel control valve be
blocked open. Preferably, however, the vessel o p e r a t o r m a y
convince the facility to allow t h e vessel control valve to be
set at a p r e s s u r e below the facility set p r e s s u r e b u t above t h e
low pressure a l a r m point. In this a r r a n g e m e n t , t h e vessel
valve would n o r m a l l y r e m a i n fully open, b u t in the e v e n t t h e
shore side valve failed open, t h e vessel control valve would
close as necessary to m a i n t a i n t h e vessel's t a n k pressure. This
a r r a n g e m e n t allows the facility to o p e r a t e in t h e i r n o r m a l
m a n n e r and also provides vessel personnel w i t h a s s u r a n c e
t h a t the facility system will not pull v a c u u m on t h e vessel's
tanks.
Pressure units--None of t h e regulations, guidelines or con-
trol m e a s u r e s address t h e subject of units of pressure. As a
result, facilities a n d vessels use different units such as pounds
per square inch absolute (psia); pound p e r square inch gage
(psig); inches of w a t e r gage (INWG); m i l l i m e t e r s w a t e r gage
(mmWG). A t facilities where t h e units of p r e s s u r e a r e differ-
e n t t h a n those used on the vessel, it is r e c o m m e n d e d a conver-
sion table be provided a t t h e pre-loading conference a n d
a g r e e m e n t be reached as to which units a r e to be used in
communications between t h e facility a n d vessel.
Standby time--Initial o p e r a t i o n of t h e v a p o r control sys-
tems has resulted in s u b s t a n t i a l increases in s t a n d b y t i m e a t
t e r m i n a l loading berths. As shoreside a n d vessel p e r s o n n e l
become accustomed to t h e a d d i t i o n a l o p e r a t i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s
of vapor control, it is expected t h a t s t a n d b y t i m e will be
reduced to a n acceptable level. In fact, a f t e r t h r e e to four
m o n t h s of operation, reductions in s t a n d b y t i m e a r e being
realized. N u m e r o u s factors h a v e c o n t r i b u t e d to t h e i n c r e a s e
in s t a n d b y time. Some b u t not all a r e included h e r e i n to
provide the r e a d e r with a n idea of t h e incidents t h a t h a v e to
be t a k e n into account.
M a n y facility systems a r o u n d t h e San F r a n c i s c o a r e a a r e
incineration-type systems, which utilize a t h e r m a l oxidizer
as t h e destruction device. The oxidizers have w a r m - u p periods
on t h e order of t h r e e to four hours. F a i l u r e to w a r m up t h e
oxidizer prior to a vessel's a r r i v a l can cause delay. Also, cer-
t a i n shutdown scenarios will r e s u l t in s u b s t a n t i a l cooling of
t h e oxidizer stack. A n y such s h u t d o w n will r e q u i r e t h e oxi-
MARINE TECHNOLOGY 185
dizer to be w a r m e d up to p r o p e r o p e r a t i n g t e m p e r a t u r e , prior
to r e s t a r t i n g cargo operations.
U.S. Coast G u a r d R e g u l a t i o n s have s u b s t a n t i a l testing a n d
c a l i b r a t i o n r e q u i r e m e n t s for system m o n i t o r i n g a n d shut-
down devices, t h a t m u s t be accomplished w i t h i n 24 hr" of a
loading event. W h e n e v e r a device fails to pass the t e s t i n g
a n d / o r c a l i b r a t i o n devices, t i m e is required to r e p a i r a n d / o r
r e p l a c e t h e failed component.
A t m a n y of t h e facilities in t h e Bay area, the Bay A r e a A i r
Q u a l i t y M a n a g e m e n t District requires t h a t t h e t a n k s into
which a r e g u l a t e d cargo is to be loaded be tested for leaks
w i t h i n the first 20% of t h e loading. This testing can be per-
f o r m e d e i t h e r by a n i n d e p e n d e n t gaging c o m p a n y or by t h e
vessel's crew. Regardless of who performs t h e tests, a n y leaks
above t h e 10 000 p p m t h r e s h o l d m u s t be rectified within one-
h a l f h o u r of discovery, or loading is to be c u r t a i l e d until ..such
t i m e t h a t t h e l e a k can be fixed. W h e r e a n outside gaging
c o m p a n y is used, t h e r e is also a p o t e n t i a l for d e l a y if person-
nel a r e not i m m e d i a t e l y a v a i l a b l e a t the r e q u i r e d time. The
S o u t h Coast A i r Q u a l i t y M a n a g e m e n t District Control Mea-
sure, which goes into effect on J a n u a r y 1994, imposes a 1000
p p m l e a k threshold, which could have an a d d i t i o n a l i m p a c t
on this t y p e of delay.
Facility shutdowns--For facilities, t h e r e g u l a t i o n s require
t h a t a quick closing valve be provided n e a r the facility vapor
connection a n d t h a t t h e valve close within 30 seconds after
detection of a n y of numerous, specified shutdown conditions
w i t h i n the facility system. A t m a n y facilities, this quick clos-
ing r e q u i r e m e n t has been e x t e n d e d to t h e stop valves in t h e
cargo lines. The r a t i o n a l e being when v a p o r flow stops, cargo
flow should also be t e r m i n a t e d to p r e v e n t pressure b u i l d u p
in t h e vessel's tanks.
F o r vessels t h a t engage in s i m u l t a n e o u s loading a n d dis-
c h a r g e operations, t h e facility's shutdown logic should be
c a r e f u l l y discussed a n d understood d u r i n g the pre-loading
conference. If t h e facility control logic in a vapor shutdown
condition closes a cargo valve t h a t t h e vessel can conceivably
be p u m p i n g against, t h e hose could be subjected to a cargo
p u m p shutoff head.
Leak Testing--Leak testing of t a n k p e n e t r a t i o n s in accord-
ance w i t h E P A Method No. 21 is required by m a n y of the
control m e a s u r e s in effect today. E P A Method 21 outlines a
p r o c e d u r e t h a t employs a p o r t a b l e i n s t r u m e n t to detect VOC
l e a k s for i n d i v i d u a l sources. The type of i n s t r u m e n t is not
called out, b u t t h e specifications for it are. The most com-
m o n l y used i n s t r u m e n t in use on t h e West Coast is an Organic
V a p o r A n a l y z e r (OVA). This t y p e of i n s t r u m e n t is portable,
e a s y to use, o p e r a t e s a p p r o x i m a t e l y eight hours on a b a t t e r y
charge, a n d is a v a i l a b l e in intrinsically-safe models. The raa-
j o r d r a w b a c k s of t h e i n s t r u m e n t s a r e t h a t t h e y have high
i n i t i a l cost a n d r e q u i r e c a l i b r a t i o n by a qualified technician
on t h r e e - m o n t h intervals.
E P A Method 21 offers bubble testing as an alternatl[ve
s c r e e n i n g procedure with some l i m i t a t i o n s prior to using a
p o r t a b l e meter. A r e a s t h a t a r e proven bubble t i g h t need rmt
be tested with t h e OVA. The l i m i t a t i o n s a r e t h a t bubble test-
ing c a n n o t be used on e q u i p m e n t with continuously moving
p a r t s (such as shaft seals when a p u m p is running) or on
e q u i p m e n t t h a t has open a r e a s too large to be bridged by t h e
soap solution. In tests using t h e bubble test a n d an OVA
together, it has been found t h a t emissions from s m a l l leaks,
identified using t h e bubble test, were well below t h e 10 000
p p m t h r e s h o l d p e r m i t t e d by t h e control measures. Therefore,
p r o v i n g all p e n e t r a t i o n s bubble t i g h t m a y be in excess of t h e
t i g h t n e s s level n e c e s s a r y to pass an AQMD inspection.
186 JULY 1993
Conclusions
The oil t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n d u s t r y as a whole has responded
d i l i g e n t l y to meet t h e new r e q u i r e m e n t s of v a p o r control t h a t
have been imposed by local a i r q u a l i t y m a n a g e m e n t districts.
P r i o r to t h e issuance of r e g u l a t i o n s by the U.S. Coast G u a r d
t h a t governed t h e construction s t a n d a r d s , m a n y o p e r a t o r s
were v o l u n t a r i l y engaged in t h e design of vessel s y s t e m s in
an effort to meet t h e effective dates of the control measures.
In m a n y cases, i n s t a l l a t i o n w o r k a c t u a l l y c o m m e n c e d before
the final U.S. Coast G u a r d r e g u l a t i o n s b e c a m e effective.
In spite of the efforts expended to date, t h e i n d u s t r y still
faces w h a t m a y be its g r e a t e s t challenge with respect to v a p o r
control. Local a i r q u a l i t y m a n a g e m e n t districts continue to
pass control m e a s u r e s a r o u n d t h e c o u n t r y in a n effort to m e e t
the r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h e Clean A i r Act of 1990. The control
m e a s u r e s all have t h e s a m e f u n d a m e n t a l goal, b u t t h e i r spe-
cific r e q u i r e m e n t s v a r y from one location to a n o t h e r . Efforts
to achieve consistency a m o n g t h e control m e a s u r e s by t h e
i n d u s t r y have been m a r g i n a l l y successful at best. Vessels,
which by t h e i r v e r y n a t u r e a r e c o n s t a n t l y moving b e t w e e n
j u r i s d i c t i o n a l areas, a r e being subjected to a v a r i e t y of new
requirements. Consequently, a vessel with a collection system
designed a n d i n s t a l l e d when t h e initial control m e a s u r e s
were enacted m a y s o m e d a y have severely r e s t r i c t e d utility,
unless a major refit is made.
The major gain in t h e control of VOC emissions from t a n k
vessels will come from t h e r e g u l a t i o n of f r e q u e n t operations,
such as cargo loading. M a r g i n a l gains t h a t m a y be realized by
r e g u l a t i n g infrequent events, such as h y d r o c a r b o n purging,
need to be reconsidered. To recover vapor d u r i n g t a n k purg-
ing operations m a y in some cases be justified, b u t t h e collec-
tion system required is vastly m o r e complex a n d costly t h a n
t h a t r e q u i r e d for loading operations only. The v e r y complex-
ity of such systems could r e s u l t in a net i n c r e a s e in VOC
emissions, due to increases in o p e r a t i o n a l upsets. Also, t h e
wisdom of r e g u l a t i n g b a l l a s t i n g operations (into cargo tanks)
should be questioned. B a l l a s t i n g into cargo t a n k s has a l r e a d y
been legislated into extinction on t h e F e d e r a l level as t h e
i n d u s t r y is compelled to replace its existing fleet w i t h new
double-hulled ships with segregated b a l l a s t tanks.
Now t h a t vapor control has been i m p l e m e n t e d in t h e S a n
Francisco Bay Area, s u b s t a n t i a l reductions in VOC emissions
can a n d a r e being achieved. However, it is a p p r o p r i a t e to
assess t h e effectiveness of the original concept in m e e t i n g
its i n t e n d e d mission a n d to consider a n y i m p o r t a n t lessons
l e a r n e d t h a t m i g h t help improve f u t u r e activities in o t h e r
geographical areas. One f u n d a m e n t a l l y i m p o r t a n t s e g m e n t
of vapor control which m a y benefit from r e e x a m i n a t i o n is
t h e selection of control technology. Most control m e a s u r e s in
effect today state only specific reduction levels for VOC's; t h e
technology by which t h e reduction is accomplished is left to
the facility operator. In t h e San Francisco Bay A r e a , it is of
i n t e r e s t to note t h a t prior to e n a c t m e n t of t h e control mea-
sure, the two facilities t h a t had a p p l i e d for p e r m i t s to i n s t a l l
m a r i n e vapor control systems chose recovery type processes.
Subsequent to e n a c t m e n t of the control m e a s u r e , w i t h speci-
fied reduction levels, most all facilities have selected incinera-
tion t y p e processes. This decision h a s c l e a r l y b e e n m o t i v a t e d
by t h e considerations of cost and a need to m a k e a conserva-
tive selection, which will g u a r a n t e e complete compliance
with t h e control limits over a long period of time, even with
some d e t e r i o r a t i o n in performance. However, t h a t decision
also has consequences such as d r a m a t i c increases in t h e gen-
e r a t i o n of combustion products, which a r e e x h a u s t e d to t h e
atmosphere. F u r t h e r , for systems h a n d l i n g n o n - i n e r t e d ves-
sels, a d d i t i o n a l fuel is injected into t h e vapor to i n s u r e t h a t
t h e m a t e r i a l flowing in t h e system is "over-rich." Such conse-
quences raise t h e question, " A r e we g e t t i n g best possible cost/
MARINE TECHNOLOGY
benefit ratio in the reduction of air pollution from the vapor
control systems?" What seems to be lacking at this point is
a carefully reasoned and thoroughly developed study of vapor
control performance. Such a study would consider the rela-
tive abilities of the different technologies (i.e., refrigeration,
incineration, absorption, etc.) to remove VOC's from the va-
por stream, the consequent quantity and type of discharge
JULY 1993
products of each system, the relative energy consumption,
and conventional pollution created by each system. The re-
sults of such an analysis could then be used to either confirm
the current methods of control technology selection or sug-
gest that by adjusting the basic control limit, a better technol-
ogy could be utilized which would result in greater overall
reductions in air pollution, quite possibly at a lesser cost.
MARINE TECHNOLOGY 187